rate the last movie you saw

[Paul MacLean]

Brosnan uttering "I thought Christmas only came once a year" nearly made me throw my popcorn box at the screen when I saw it, and I would love to ask him if he ever winced at the thought of saying it out loud.

That was B-A-D for sure.

[Jedbu]

If for no other reason than eliminating those "know what I mean-nudge-nudge" "witty" wise cracks, I am so glad the Bond films have taken a different tack with Daniel Craig in the role. Those are what turned me off the Moores after a while and really made me start disliking the Brosnans the same way.

[Monterey Jack]

-DeepStar Six (1989): 1/10



Wow...this is even worse than Leviathan. Cheap, shoddy, bereft of suspense and with a silly-looking "monster", it's totally the pits. At least Leviathan, bad as it was, boasted a superior (albeit wasted) cast and a servicable Jerry Goldsmith score. The only recognizable actors to be found in DeepStar Six are Miguel Ferrer and Nia Peeples (Yes!, goes my teenage self ). Harry Manfedini's score has a pleasant title cue, but otherwise is pretty stock. What crap.

[Paul MacLean]

Interstellar (spoilers below!)

A very good film with impressive visuals, and certainly the best thing I've seen from Christopher Nolan (though I have yet to see The Dark Knight Rises). I appreciated that Nolan did his homework and showed a willingness to respect scientific theory (for the most part anyway). Opting for silence in the outer space sequences was an admirable -- and effective -- choice (and added rather than detracted from the action -- in particular the cold sterility of Matt Damon's death scene). The visual effects are also top-notch, in particular the chilling image of the "Gargantua" black hole, and the massive tidal waves.

Alas, the script does "paint itself into a corner" and is forced to resolve the story with a climax that is more fantasy than science. I also found the ending a bit unsatisfying -- Matthew McConaughey spends the entire film vowing to return to his young daughter, only to finally do so when she is in her 90s on her death bed (which is kind of a lead balloon). I also would have liked at least one shot of him greeting Anne Hathaway on the new planet, instead of showing her alone. (I mean we know he's on his way there, but couldn't we just see them together? Maybe Nolan thought it would be "too sentimental"?)

But overall the story is sold and watchable, with strong, three-dimensional (and well-acted) characters and a good measure of suspense and thrills. In all a "really good" movie -- which is sad, because with a real score, by someone like John Williams or James Horner (where they are permitted to do their thing) Interstellar could have been truly great. Hans Zimmer's music is, as usual, blunt, simplistic white sound. As a result the characters are less empathetic, the moments of suspense are less engaging, and the overall threat of humanity's extinction carries insufficient weight. Zimmer completely fails to uplift and invest the film with the emotional resonance a real composer would have provided. His music really spoils the film (but not in a way most people will ever realize). And that's a shame.

[mkaroly]

Paul - another good review. I agree with what you say, especially the last couple of sentences. I railed against Zimmer in my blurb in the INTERSTELLAR thread...lol...couldn't help myself. While the film is emotionally distant in some respects, I was still moved by it and felt it was entertaining.

[AndyDursin]

The one thing with Zimmer's music is that it adds absolutely NOTHING to the film at all. It has no texture, no thematic component -- nothing. It's one of the most useless scores I can think of for a movie that desperately needed it.

I truly wonder what the film would've been like had it been scored by someone else. Which is why I wish Spielberg had made it, back when he was circulating around the project. The emotional component of the journey would've been much stronger and compelling, and the family themes would've made it a much better match for Spielberg's sensitivities than A.I. Not to mention, Williams would've brought something interesting to the film musically than Zimmer cannot ever hope to duplicate.

On Nolan's end, I liked it more than the likes of THE PRESTIGE, INCEPTION, and MEMENTO, but I definitely didn't like it as much as you guys. I also found the Matt Damon element unintentionally funny. "Look, it's my old robot -- I unplugged it!" I nearly laughed outloud at that dialogue, so predictable in telling you where that whole plot was headed. His confrontation with McConaughey should've been scored with the ARENA episode music from STAR TREK.

I also didn't understand how McConaughey could just go back through the wormhole at the end to see Hathaway. Wouldn't she be about 100 years older now also?

And that was the thing with the ending -- I agree with Paul, show them together. It's something Spielberg would have delivered completely on, but with Nolan, emotion is not his strong suit. I wanted to feel something at the end, but his own directorial style holds it back.

[AndyDursin]

THE GIVER
6.5/10

Lois Lowry’s rightfully celebrated young adult novel – written decades before the likes of “Twilight” and “The Hunger Games” – finally made it to the screen in the form of a serviceable, if eventually unsatisfying, film from producer Jeff Bridges (who also stars) and director Philip Noyce.

Michael Mitnick and Robert Weide’s script follows a young man (Brenton Thwaites) in a future world where feeling is regulated by a governing body that prevents anyone and anything unique from flourishing in its environment. “The Giver” film starts off well with Thwaites – designated as a “receiver” for the suppressed memories and feelings of a past civilization – realizing what parts of life have been drained from the society he’s living in, and Bridges is fine as the title character – a sage who attempts to show the young man what he’s been missing. Other roles, though, are thinly drawn, from Meryl Streep’s government authority figure to Alexander Skarsgard and Katie Holmes as Thwaites’ parents.

Lowry’s themes are developed here to a degree, but in literalizing her somewhat ambiguous tale, the film has to come up with a standard-issue third act, which plays out like an underwhelming teenage version of “Logan’s Run.” The end result is too bland to effectively convey the range of emotion in Lowry’s book, though it’s at least more thoughtfully rendered than most of the “young adult” flicks currently infiltrating the market. Nice score by Marco Beltrami as well.

[Monterey Jack]

The one thing with Zimmer's music is that it adds absolutely NOTHING to the film at all. It has no texture, no thematic component -- nothing. It's one of the most useless scores I can think of for a movie that desperately needed it.

One thing that baffles me about Nolan...for a filmmaker who is so generally incapable/unwilling to showcase actual EMOTION, why does he insist on having music blaring CONSTANTLY and LOUDLY in all of his films? I mean, it's one thing when Spielberg makes a old-fashioned tearjerker like E.T. or War Horse and smothers it with John Williams' music...at least there, the music is constantly poking and prodding the audience along with distinctive melodies, doing all the things that film music should do (otherwise, why have music at all?). But with Nolan, whether it's Batman, dueling magicians, or weepy astronauts, the music is just...there, taking up space, for HOURS. It's literally white noise, neither helping nor hindering the movies they're written to support, just filling space in-between the already-overwrought modern-day sound design. And with his last two films, it's gotten exponentially worse, with that obnoxious "DISHY-DISHY, PASTA-PASTA!" chant from Dark Knight Rises and the maddening organ from Interstellar often times drowning out the dialogue, even for key scenes like (SPOILER) Michael Caine's deathbed confession. Since the music so rarely seems to "connect" with the images as they unspool, it has the effect of trying to watch a movie while another, louder movie plays in the room next to you and bleeds through the wall. And yeah, composers like John Barry, Ennio Morricone and Bernard Herrmann pioneered the "play through a scene" technique in film scoring, not usually "Mickey Mouse-ing" the onscreen action but writing something to set an overall "mood", at least they were writing actual music, not blaring horn farts and the same simplistic chugga-chugga-chugga synth/string ostinato over and over. Why not try having your next movie have no score at all, Nolan (or at least judiciously-spotted music)? It's like pouring an ENTIRE BOTTLE of ketchup over your French fries and burger...after a certain point, the "added flavor" swamps the meal it's supposed to just be enhancing.

[AndyDursin]

I mean, it's one thing when Spielberg makes a old-fashioned tearjerker like E.T. or War Horse and smothers it with John Williams' music...at least there, the music is constantly poking and prodding the audience along with distinctive melodies, doing all the things that film music should do (otherwise, why have music at all?).

But Williams' music also has modulation. It has an ornate dramatic sense. There are more quiet, introspective, poignant moments in E.T. that aren't big, grand and operatic -- people who only remember the last 10 minutes don't remember (or want to acknowledge) any of it, and yet it's there, and that music is just as gorgeous. That's why when Spielberg and Williams go big and make a bold dramatic statement at the end of the movie, it as effective as any ending in cinema history. The music has such power, there's no need to end it with dialogue, or another scene (which they shot) -- that movie had nothing else to say at that moment, and it was because Williams built that score up so brilliantly from the beginning through to the end, that it was over. And if you listen to the music, it tells the story of the film on its own, from the mysterious opening, through to the low-key and lovely scenes of Elliott and E.T. bonding, all before the operatic finale.

Zimmer, seemingly, just has no sense of telling a story musically. His music doesn't modulate, it doesn't know how to function in a way that enhances the specific story that's being told. It operates the way most modern film music does, in a white-noise/keep-the-ADD-audience-glued type of way, but it has no musical component that is compelling or ENHANCES what's on-screen IMO.

James Horner understands how to tell a story musically, but there are fewer and fewer composers out there who do. And it's unfortunate Nolan has no interest in working with anyone else, because frankly, Zimmer's scores are a liability across all of his films -- and most especially this one, which could have used a real, genuine film score.

[Paul MacLean]

I also didn't understand how McConaughey could just go back through the wormhole at the end to see Hathaway. Wouldn't she be about 100 years older now also?

I thought it was it the "ocean" planet's close proximity to the black hole that altered time, rather than traveling through the wormhole. Tho that doesn't explain why time moved slower for the guy who remained in the orbiter (which was barely any further from the black hole). Of course the film was confusing at times -- in large part due to the dialog which (I agree) was audibly unclear (even in scenes that didn't have music over it!).

[AndyDursin]

I also didn't understand how McConaughey could just go back through the wormhole at the end to see Hathaway. Wouldn't she be about 100 years older now also?

I thought it was it the "ocean" planet's close proximity to the black hole that altered time, rather than traveling through the wormhole. Tho that doesn't explain why time moved slower for the guy who remained in the orbiter (which was barely any further from the black hole). Of course the film was confusing at times -- in large part due to the dialog which (I agree) was audibly unclear (even in scenes that didn't have music over it!).

I assumed time was going to be messed up no matter what -- but the ocean planet accelerated faster (exponentially) than the others in that galaxy. I dunno, some of the explanation was gobble-degook lol.

[Monterey Jack]

But Williams' music also has modulation. It has an ornate dramatic sense. There are more quiet, introspective, poignant moments in E.T. that aren't big, grand and operatic -- people who only remember the last 10 minutes don't remember (or want to acknowledge) any of it, and yet it's there, and that music is just as gorgeous. That's why when Spielberg and Williams go big and make a bold dramatic statement at the end of the movie, it as effective as any ending in cinema history. The music has such power, there's no need to end it with dialogue, or another scene (which they shot) -- that movie had nothing else to say at that moment, and it was because Williams built that score up so brilliantly from the beginning through to the end, that it was over. And if you listen to the music, it tells the story of the film on its own, from the mysterious opening, through to the low-key and lovely scenes of Elliott and E.T. bonding, all before the operatic finale.

That's right, and that's why I get annoyed when critics do their usual "features a typically bombastic John Williams score" blurb in their reviews...for every Star Wars or Superman where the music is up-front and center, there's a Stanley & Iris or a Book Thief where Williams supports the onscreen drama without smothering it. And even the "big" Williams scores have moments where the music backs off and either goes away at the proper moment (think of the bar fight in Raiders, or the T-Rex setpiece in Jurassic Park) or softly adds melodies and colors that enhance the viewing experience. Today's "understated" film music is anything but...it takes away all of the melody and leaves nothing but DENSITY, where every moment is treated like a "trailer" moment, with the music turned up to eleven but lacking any sort of shape or structure that tells the viewer anything more than "loud = pay attention, soft = relax, it's over". I remember Lukas and the FSM gang complaining about this way back in 1996 with a magazine cover featuring both Superman and the then-contemporary Eraser...and the sad thing is, even the "bland" orchestral scores they were grousing about back in the day would sound ambrosial compared to what passes for action music today. Even a rote 90's Goldsmith action piece like U.S. Marshals or Chain Reaction would sound amazing in the modern-day film music environment...at least back then, you could tell a DIFFERENCE between music and sound design. And it's remarkable how much even a moderately "old-school" approach can enhance a fairly routine action flick...take that Jason Statham movie, Safe, from a few years back. It delivered all of the usual broken arms and bullet-riddled corpses you expect from the genre, but Mark Mothersbaugh's sleek, 70's-style musical score was like a jolt of adrenaline, sounding like something Goldsmith or Lalo Schifrin might have written circa 1972, and that, more than anything else in that enjoyable but not very original movie, elevated it immensely. I was expecting all of the usual buzzing electronics and horn farts, and instead heard bongos, stuttering, low-end piano clusters, flutes, and...music, glorious, glorious MUSIC! I'm still kind of amazed that score made it through to the final movie...would have expected something that up-front and melodic to have gotten rejected and replaced by Harry Gregson-Williams or Steve Jablonsky.

[AndyDursin]

Today's "understated" film music is anything but...it takes away all of the melody and leaves nothing but DENSITY, where every moment is treated like a "trailer" moment, with the music turned up to eleven but lacking any sort of shape or structure that tells the viewer anything more than "loud = pay attention, soft = relax, it's over"

And movies themselves today are paced like 2-hour trailers. Many of them at least.

remember Lukas and the FSM gang complaining about this way back in 1996 with a magazine cover featuring both Superman and the then-contemporary Eraser...and the sad thing is, even the "bland" orchestral scores they were grousing about back in the day would sound ambrosial compared to what passes for action music today.

The mid 90s were the beginning of the end, because it was at that point when studios I think consciously began dailing out the importance of film scoring. "Dont make it too thematic, emotional, etc." -- that started back then. And I agree, even Goldsmith's weaker scores from that era are better than most anything we hear today -- but the reality is also that he was going downhill and his music from that period just isn't as interesting or memorable or effective as what he was writing 5, 10, especially 15 years prior.

All I know is that it's sad, but I started focusing on movies and drifting away from film music right about 1996 or 1997. I made the right choice!

[AndyDursin]

The other thing I find is that my tolerance for all these comic book movies and "popcorn" films is dropping rapidly. Growing up it was my favorite genre, but I'm realizing how much of my affection for those films was built partially around their music scores. Now that the music is no longer a component in them -- for example, most Marvel films have horrible soundtracks (I don't have 1 that I listen to on even a semi-regular basis) -- I'm finding myself increasingly bored by them. You know their formula, they're all well-made, but without compelling music to emotionally engage me, I'm just not that interested. "Been there, done that", etc.

[TomServo]

The other thing I find is that my tolerance for all these comic book movies and "popcorn" films is dropping rapidly. Growing up it was my favorite genre, but I'm realizing how much of my affection for those films was built partially around their music scores. Now that the music is no longer a component in them -- for example, most Marvel films have horrible soundtracks (I don't have 1 that I listen to on even a semi-regular basis) -- I'm finding myself increasingly bored by them. You know their formula, they're all well-made, but without compelling music to emotionally engage me, I'm just not that interested. "Been there, done that", etc.

Sadly, I'm in the same boat. But it could be an age thing, since I'm pretty sure we're in the same range.